..'^„.. 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


1.1 


|45 

■10 


i 


^  B^    12.2 

40   mil  2.0 


us 

u 


IL25  i  1.4 


—    6" 


1.6 


Photographic 
_,Sdences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  87^-450:i 


v# 


•1>^ 


C\ 


\ 


^<^ 


\ 


O^ 


fA 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHIVI/ICIViH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Tachnical  and  Bibliographic  Notas/Notas  tachniquat  at  bibliographiquaa 


Tha  Instituta  has  attamptad  to  obtain  tha  bast 
original  copy  availabia  for  filming.  Faatures  of  this 
copy  which  may  ba  bibliographically  uniqua, 
which  may  altar  any  of  the  imagas  in  tha 
raproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
tha  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


□    Coloured  covers/ 
Couvftfture  de  couleur 


r~n    Covers  damaged/ 


D 


a 
n 


n 


Couverturs  endommagie 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurie  at/ou  pellicula 


r~^    Cover  tftle  missing/ 


Le  titra  de  couverture  manque 


r—i    Coloured  maps/ 


Cartas  giographiquea  en  couleur 


□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

I      I    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


D 


Planchea  at/ou  illuatrations  en  couleur 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
ReliA  avac  d'autres  documents 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  r«  liura  serrie  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  l«  long  de  la  marge  :nt6rieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  c(ue  certain«s  pages  blanchaa  ajoutias 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte. 
mais,  lorsque  ceia  Atait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
paa  iti  filmtes. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commantairas  supplAmantairas; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm*  le  meilleur  axemplaira 
qu'il  lui  a  iti  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaira  qui  sont  peut-Atre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique.  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modificatlcn  dans  la  mithode  normale  de  filmaga 
sont  indiqute  ci-dessous. 


r~~1   Coloured  pages/ 


D 


Pagee  de  couleur 

Pagea  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagies 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restaurias  at/ou  pelliculAes 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxei 
Pages  dicoiordes,  tachaties  ou  piquAes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ditachies 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Qualiti  inigale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  matarii 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppiimentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


rri  Pagea  damaged/ 

I      I  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

r~71  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

r~n  Pages  detached/ 

ryi  Showthrough/ 

rn  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

rn  Includes  supplementary  material/ 

r~|  Only  edition  available/ 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiallement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  iti  fi!m6es  i  nouveau  de  fapon  ^ 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu*  ci-dessous. 


10X 


14X 


18X 


22X 


26X 


XX 


nk-iji 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


a 

ktails 
I  du 
lodifiar 
r  una 
Image 


Th«  copy  filmed  here  hee  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Seminary  of  Queliec 
Library 

The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  Iceeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


L'exempiaire  film4  fut  reproduit  grftce  A  la 
g^nirositi  de: 

Simlnalre  de  Quebec 
Bibliothdque 

Les  images  suivantes  ont  At4  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  at 
de  la  nettet*  de  l'exempiaire  film4,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
fllmage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  bacic  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrsted  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impreesion. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — ^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"). 
whichev«ir  applies. 


Les  Dxemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  an 
papier  est  imprimte  sont  fiimte  en  commonpant 
par  le  premier  plat  at  an  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  amprainte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  axemplairas 
originaux  sont  filmte  an  commenpant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  at  an  terminant  par 
la  derniAre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
«mpreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaftra  sur  la 
derniAre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  Se 
cas:  le  symbols  —»>  signifie  "A  SUIVRE  ".  Je 
symbols  V  signifie    FIN". 


irrata 
to 


pelure, 
n  i 


n 


32X 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  iii  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


1 

2 

3 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
filmte  d  des  taux  de  rMuction  diff fronts. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seui  cliche,  ii  est  filmi  A  partir 
de  I'angle  sup^rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  baa,  an  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ntcessaira.  Les  diagrainmes  suivants 
illustrent  ta  m^t'  ode. 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

SPEECH 


OP 


HON.  JOHN  A.  DIX,  OF  NEW  YORK, 


IN    FAVi 


RECIPROCAL  TRADE 


ANADA : 


DELIVERED 


IN  THE  SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES.^JANUARY  23,  1849. 


WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED   AT   THE    GLOBE    OFFICE. 

1849. 


'S 


o 


\?v^ 


^^ 


d 


'-> 


#> 


%  ^ 


f0» 


TRADE  WITH  CANADA. 


The  Sonotelmviiig  under  considftralinn  llie  bill  to ndmit  cer- 
tain nrliclns  of  the  growth  or  production  oCCanndainlothc 
United  States  free  of 'luty,  upon  the  condition  tliat  the  like 
articles  of  tho  growth  or  production  of  the  United  States 
are  adiiiitied  into  Canada  l^ee  of  duty;  thoquestion  pend- 
ing being  upon  an  amendment  herctotbre  submitted  by 
Mr.  PiiELrs : 

Mr.  DIX  said:  Mr,  President, sitice  this  bill  was 
taken  up  for  discussion,  I  have  been  unable,  from 
indisposition  and  other  causes,  to  bestow  upon  it 
the  reflection  which  is  due  to  the  importance  of  the 
subject.  But  I  will  proceed,  nevertheless,  with 
Buch  preparation  as  I  have  been  able  to  make,  to 
explain  the  objects  of  the  measure  and  ita  probable 
effects;  and  1  will  endeavor,  at  the  same  time,  to 
answer  some  of  the  leading  objections  which  have 
been  made  to  it. 

If  I  entertained  thebelief  that  theoperation  of  the 
bill  would  be  prejudicial  to  the  interest  of  any  por- 
tion of  the  Union,  I  should  not  be  its  advocate. 
The  first  object  of  all  public  legislation  is  to  ad- 
vance the  general  welfare  of  the  country;  but  this 
object  ought  certainly  not  to  be  sought  for  at  the 
expense  of  any  particular  section,  or  indeed  of  any 
single  interest.  I  believe  this  bill  is  entirely  free 
from  objection  in  this  respect;  that  it  will  be  emi- 
nently advantageous  both  to  the  United  States  and 
Canada,  and  do  no  wrong  or  injury  in  any  quarter. 

Before  I  proceed  to  examine  the  practical  opera- 
tion of  the  measure  upon  the  commercial  interests 
of  the  two  countries,  I  wish  to  notice  a  prelimi- 
nary objection  which  has  been  raised. 

It  is  supposed  that  the  privileges  conferred  by 
this  bill  upon  Canada  will  be  extended,  by  virtue 
of  certain  reciprocity  treaties  into  which  we  have 
entered,  to  the  foreign  States  with  which  those 
engagements  have  been  contracted.  I  take  a  totally 
different  view  of  the  subject.  I  believe  Senators 
have  put  an  erroneous  construction  upon  the  obli- 
gations of  the  compacts  to  v/hich  they  refer. 

We  have  reciprocity  treaties  with  Russia,  Den- 
mark, Hanover,  Prussia,  Mecklenburg-Schwcrin, 
the  Hanseatic  Republics,  and  several  other  foreign 


countries.  They  are  treaties  with  sovereign  States, 
and,  by  every  fair  rule  of 'Construction,  their  stipu- 
lations, so  far  as  they  guaranty  reciprocity,  must  be 
deemed  to  relate  to  engagements  with  other  Powers 
equally  independent.  The  commercial  arrangement 
proposed  by  this  bill  is  with  a  European  colony 
adjoining  us— one  of  those  dependencies  which  the 
States  of  the  Eastern  hemisphere  are  accustomed  to 
except  in  their  compacts  with  us  for  reciprocity  of 
commerce  and  navigation.  Ifany  oftheStat  .swith 
which  we  have  treaties  stipulating  for  the  same  priv- 
ileges which  we  confer  on  others,  had  dependen- 
cies situated  like  Canada  in  respect  to  us,  those 
States  might  perhaps  acquire  in  respect  to  such  de- 
pendencies the  same  privileges  we  shall  confer  on 
Canada  if  ihe  bill  passes;  but  I  do  not  admit  that 
they  would  acquire  those  privileges  for  their  me- 
tropolitan possessions,  and'  for  the  reason  that  col- 
onies have  always  been  made  practical  exceptions 
to  the  general  rule  of  international  intercourse. 
Possibly  a  special  reservation  may  be  necessary  in 
every  compact,  froiTi  the  provisions  of  which  it  is 
designed  to  exclude  them;  but  I  do  not,  as  I  shall 
show,  consider  it  a  matter  of  any  consequence  iu 
this  case.  This  we  know  in  respect  to  Canada, 
that  it  is  not  only  expressly  excluded  from  the 
terms  of  our  commercial  intercourse  with  Great 
Britain,  but  it  is  the  subject  of  distinct  stipula- 
tions; and  yet  the  British  Legation,  in  accordance 
with  the  wishes  of  the  Canadians,  has  urged  this 
measure  upon  us  under  instructions  from  home,, 
without  the  least  idea  that  they  would  gain  for 
Great  Britain  under  our  reciprocity  treaty  with  her 
•he  privileges  they  desire  us  to  confer  on  Canada. 

The  honorable  Senator  from  Maryland  [iVIr.. 
Pkauce]  said  that  we  had  "  given  a  construction  to 
these  reciprocal  provisions  worthy  of  notice,"  and 
he  alluded  to  our  treaty  with  Portugal  in  1840,  by 
which  it  was  expressly  agreed  that  the  stipulation 
in  our  treaty  with  France  in  1831,  in  regard  to 
French  wines,  should  not  be  interfered  with.  This 


i 


conitruction  ia  perfectly  consistent  with  the  view 
of  the  sulijpct  I  tnke.  Tiiefle  two  tientieH  wnrc 
with  independent  Powers;  they  were  with  conii- 
nental  Powers  in  Europe  almost  bordering  on  each 
other;  and  a  general  stipulation  in  respect  to 
equality  of  duties  necessarily  required  an  express 
reservat  on  to  authorize  us  to  make  the  duties  on 
any  of  their  products  unequal.  This,  however, 
is  a  totally  dilTcrent  thing  from  a  commercial  ar- 
rangement between  us  and  u  European  colony 
adjoining  us. 

But  in  coming  to  the  conclusion  that  our  com- 
mercial relations  with  Russia,  Prussia,  and  other 
Powers,  under  the  reciprocity  treaties  we  have 
formed  with  them,  will  not  be  affected  by  this  bill, 
I  put  it  on  other  grounds. 

These  treaties  relate  to  commerce  and  naviga- 
tion, and  are  intendi'd  to  regulate  the  commercial 
intercourse  carried  on  by  those  countries  with  the 
United  States  on  the  ocean.  They  have  certainly 
not  been  understood  as  referring  to  inland  trade 
and  exchange  between  countries  bordering  on  each 
other.  The  righ'  to  regulate  their  interior  inter- 
course with  adjoining  States  has  not  been  supposed 
to  be  at  all  impaired  by  these  commercial  engage- 
ments. If  it  were  otherwise,  if  these  treaties  re- 
strained the  States  which  are  parties  to  them  from 
admitting  articles  free  of  duty  from  a  neighboring 
country,  except  upon  condition  of  extending  the 
same  privilege  to  the  other  contracting  parties,  we 
should  at  this  very  inomcnt  be  entitled,  in  our  in- 
tercourse with  Prussia,  to  all  tlie  benefits  of  the  j 
custom-house  exeinptions  of  the  ZoU-Verein,  of 
which  that  kingdom  is  a  leading  member.  Prussia 
borders  on  a  number  of  the  Zoll-Verein  States. 
These  States  interchange  with  her  their  common 
products  free  of  duty  under  the  Zoll-Verein  com- 
pact, or  Customs  Union.  They  have  stood  to 
each  other  in  the  same  relation  in  which  we  stand 
to  Canada.  They  had  duties  on  their  respective 
products  as  we  have.  Thsy  have  abolished  them, 
as  we  propoae  to  do  in  respect  to  Canada  on  a  part 
of  ours. 

Now,  will  it  be  contended  that  we  are  entitled 
to  the  same  freedom  of  intercourse  with  Prussia 
which  she  shares  with  those  States,  because  she 
has  stipulated  to  impose  no  higher  duties  on  our 
products  than  on  those  of  other  countries'  Surely 
not;  and  for  the  very  reason  that  the  stipulations 
of  our  treaty  with  her  are  intended  to  apply  to  ex 
ternal  intercourse  by  sea,  and  not  to  inland  ar- 
rangements between  bordering  States.    The  inten- 
tion of  our  treaties  of  reciprocity  is  stamped  upon 
them  in  characters  not  to  be  misunderstood.    The 
first  stipulation  (for  those  of  latter  years  are  much 
of  the  same  import)  limits  the  reciprocal  liberty  of 


conr-.nunce  and  navigation  which  the  treaties  were 
formed  to  secure  to  "  the  ports,  places,  waters, 
and  rivers  of  the  territories  of  each  party,  wherein 
foreign  commerce  isprrmitlcd."  The  second  stip- 
ulation regulates  the  duties  to  be  imposed  on  the 
vessels  of  the  contracting  parties  engaged  in  that 
commerce.  The  third  regulates  the  duties  to  be 
paid  on  the  importation  or  exportation  of  their 
respective  products.  I  admit  thot,  by  the  letter  of 
these  treaties,  this  bill  might  ad'ect  our  commercial 
relations  under  them.  But  I  insist  that  all  com- 
pacts are  to  be  construed  according  to  their  mani- 
fest intention,  not  by  one  stipulation  alone,  but  by 
all  which  relate  to  the  same  subject-matter;  and  1 
might  apply  these  observations  with  great  force  to 
my  first  position,  and  say  that  those  treaties  did 
not  contemplate  commercial  relations  with  colo- 
nial dependencies  like  Canada.  But  the  wliole 
tenor  of  their  stipulations  shows  them  to  have  been 
designed  to  regulate  commerce  on  the  sea,  and  not 
the  interior  traffic  carried  on  by  the  inhabitants  of 
countries  separated  from  each  other  by  a  mere  sta- 
tistical boundary  or  an  astronomical  line.  They 
are  treaties  of  commerce  and  navigation — not  of 
one  alone,  but  of  both  combined. 

When  this  measure  was  first  proposed,  I  in- 
quired of  the  State  and  Treasury  Departments 
whether  it  would  affect  our  commercial  relations 
with  foreign  States  under  reciprocity  treaties,  and 
a  decided  answer  was  given  by  both  in  the  nega- 
tive. My  own  examination  of  the  subject  has 
brought  me  to  the  same  conclusion,  whether  upon 
the  same  grounds  I  do  not  know. 

If  this  construction  be  erroneous,  if  the  privi- 
leges proposed  to  be  conferred  on  Canada  will  be 
extended  to  the  foreign  States  referred  to,  then,  I 
repeat,  we  shall,  on  the  same  pr!-:;ciple,  become 
entitled  to  the  privileges  of  the  ZjU-Verein,  in 
Prussia,  and  perhaps  gain  access  for  our  products, 
through  her,  to  all  the  other  States  of  that  political 
association,  comprehending,  I  believe,  twenty-eight 
out  of  the  thirty-seven  States  of  the  Germanic  Con- 
federation. This  would,;)Hj)io/rtcie,bean  immense 
advantage,  though  it  is  not  clear  t'^at  it  would  be 
of  any  practical  benefit.  But  no  one  Ircomt,  when 
our  reciprocity  treaties  were  formed,  that  they 
conferred  any  such  privileges  on  us;  and  I  venture 
to  say  it  will  never  occur  to  any  of  the  States  which 
are  parties  to  those  treaties,  that  the  proposed  ar- 
rangement with  Canada  will  confer  any  new  priv- 
ileges on  them. 

But  if  it  were  otherwise,  the  privileges  the  bill 

confers  are  reciprocal.  We  concede  lothing  which 

we  do  not  gain  in  return.     If  Hanover,  Prussia, 

and  Mecklenburg-Schwerin    should  acquire  the 

!  privileges  conferred  on  Canada  by  this  bill,  we 


«* 


filiould  ncfiuiie  in  respect  to  tliem  tlie  privilcjreH 
the  bill  confci-s  on  us.  There  would  lie  entire  reci- 
procity. Our  clianccs  of  jjrofitiiig  hy  tlie  nrrnn;;e- 
ment  would  be  ns  good  aa  theirs.  The  Iluiise- 
Towna  might  fend  ns  a  few  morn  hams;  but  there 
is  sourccly  an  iirticle  enumerated  in  the  bill  which 
cnn  be  brnu^'lit  to  us  with  tid vantage  from  the 
States  on  the  Gcrmnn  Ocean  and  the  naltie.  We 
are  too  distant  for  aLjricultura!  cxchangrs.  Tcsides, 
we  are  e.sscntially  as  ngricultural  as  they.  Wiieat 
is  the  only  article  likely,  under  any  circumstunccs, 
to  come  here,  except  in  the  most  inconsiderable 
quantities.  In  1837,  when  flour  was  ten,  eleven, 
and  twelve  dollars  a  barrel,  we  received  over  a 
million  of  bushels  of  wheat  from  Germany,  not 
half  the  quantity  we  sent  in  1847  into  Canada, 
Nova  Scotia,  and  New  Brunswick;  but  in  the  for- 
mer year,  under  the  influence  of  ihe.se  enormou.s 
prices,  England  herself  .sent  ns  over  seven  hundred 
thousand  bushels— nearly  ns  much  as  Germany; 
and  yet  she  imported  in  1847  over  eighty-six  mil- 
lions of  bushels  of  grain.  But  such  occu.sions  very 
rarely  occur;  and  when  they  do  occ\n-,  the  tend- 
ency of  importation  is  decidedly  beneficial.  Its 
influence  is  to  check  prices  when  they  reach  the 
liigh  point  of  extravagance. 

Senators  have  expressed  the  apprehension  that, 
if  this  bill  pas.scs,  we  shall,  under  the  con.struction 
they  give  to  it,  be  deluged  with  wheat  from  the 
Baltic.  Let  us  see  how  much  ground  there  is  for 
this  apprehension.  On  the  1st  of  February  wheat 
will  pay  but  one  shilling  sterling  a  quarter  in  Great 
Britain— about  three  cents  a  hnahel.  She  imports 
from  us:  we  export  to  her.  The  price  of  wheat 
there  must,  therefore,  always  be  as  much  higher 
than  the  price  here,  when  sh.e  has  a  deficiency  and 
we  a  surplus,  as  the  cost  of  carrying  wheat  to  her 
from  the  United  States,  and  this  cost,  I  am  told,  is 
about  twenty  cents  the  bushel.  When  it  is  a  dol- 
lar here,  it  must  be  i^l  20  there.  Now,  let  us  see 
what  a  vessel  laden  with  wheat  from  the  Baltic 
would  be  likely  to  do  in  such  a  case.  She  must, 
to  come  here,  sail  directly  by  the  ports  of  Great 
Britain,  where  slic  can  get  a  dollar  and  twenty 
cents  a  bushel,  deducting  the  three  cents  duty 
v/hich  she  must  pay.  She  gets,  then,  a  dollar  and 
seventeen  cents.  Suppose  she  continues  her  voy- 
age to  the  United  Slates,  how  will  the  account 
stand  ?  Admitting,  for  the  sake  of  th.c  argument, 
that  the  wheat  she  brings  will  come  in  f;ec  of  duly 
under  our  reciprocity  treaties,  she  will  get  one  dol- 
lar a  bu&hcl;  but  from  this  amount  she  must  deduct 
twenty  cents  for  co.st  of  transiiorlation  from  Great 
Britain  here.  She  will  get  eighty  cents  here  in- 
slCcid  of  one  dollar  and  seventeen  cents  in  Eng- 
land— thirty-seven  cents  a  bushel  less;  and  this, 


on  ft  cargo  of  sevrrnl  thousand  bushels,  will  amount 
to  no  inconsiderable  sum.  The  Northern  Germans 
have  the  reputation  of  being  rather  heavy,  but  ihcy 
are,  so  far  aa  I  have  had  the  opponuniiy  of  ob- 
serving them,  the  Yankees  of  the  Continent  in 
bargaining;  and  I  think  they  will  be  found  alto- 
gether too  astute  to  engage  in  any  such  enterprises 
ns  honoralde  Srnntors  apprehend.  They  will  carry 
on  a  .severe  competition  with  ua  in  supplying  Eng- 
land with  wheat;  but  they  are  just  as  unlikely  to 
compete  with  ub  in  our  markets  ns  we  are  to  com- 
pete with  Newcastle  in  supplying  London  with 
coal. 

Under  the  construction,  therefore,  which  Sena- 
tors give  to  tlie  bill,  I  am  satisfied  its  operation 
would  be  as  beneficial  to  us  aa  to  the  States  with 
which  we  have  reciprocity  treaties.  But  I  contend 
that  these  treaties  will  not  be  aflected  by  this  nr- 
rangcmrnt.  If  I  am  mistaken,  tlie  privileges  we 
confer  will  also  be  acquired  by  us,  and  we  cannot, 
in  any  event,  be  losers. 

Let  me  now  turn  to  con.niden.  ionswliich  directly 
concern  the  commercial  intercourse  of  Canada  und 
the  United  States. 

In  order  to  understand  the  sul'ject  in  all  its  bear- 
ings, it  will  be  necessary  to  see  what  Catuula  is, 
and  what  she  lias  done  for  us  in  the  lemoval  of 
restrictions  upon  our  commerce  with  her. 

The  population  of  Canada  (I  usea  general  term, 
as  the  two  provinces  nre  now  united)  is  1,527,75 
soul.^,  or,  in  round  numbers,  a  million  and  a  half. 
With  less  variety  and  fertility  of  soil  than  the 
United  States,  a  more  rigorous  climate,  and  with 
colonial  rc'strictions  calculated,  imder  the  most 
favorable  view  of  the  subject,  to  impede  the  devel- 
opment of  her  resources,  to  shar.kle  the  operations 
of  industry,  and  to  abridge  the  freedom  of  indi- 
vidual enterprise,  which  is  always  the  most  pow- 
erful stimulus  to  exertion,  it  is  not  to  be  expected 
that  her  progress  will  keep  pnce  with  our  own  in 
population  or  in  social  and  physical  improvement. 
The  policy  of  Great  Britain  has,  within  a  few 
years,  utulergone  some  important  changes,  favor- 
able to  her  in  a  cominercial  and  political  view. 
Canada,  it  is  true,  has  lost  some  exclusive  privi- 
leges by  a  relaxation  of  the  colonial  system  cf  the 
mother  cnuntiy,  but  the  latter  has  extended  to  her 
some  new  facilities,  by  surrendeiing  the  control  of 
the  custom-house,  .--o  far  as  respects  the  irnposition 
of  duties;  and  she  has  also  conceded  the  principle 
of  the  resjionsibility  of  ministers  which  exists  at 
home,  so  thn  when  the  Governor  is  not  sustained 
in  his  polii'y  by  the  Provincial  rnrliament,  he  is 
bound  to  chaiige  his  advisers,  or,  in  other  words, 
his  Executive  Council,  wliich  may  be  considered 
as   the  ministry  of  the  colony.    The   Canadian 


6 


Governmciil  is  thus  asHimilu'fd  to  that  of  Great 
Britnin  in  the  esscntinl  feature  of  its  reHponsiljiliiy 
to  the  iii>|>ul(\r  voire — ii  concession  wh'cn  hus  been 
gniiird  (iflcr  a  lon^'  and  patient  8lru;,'(;!e  on  the  [)art 
of  a  few  nlilc  and  patriotic  men  in  Canada. 

Almost  colemporanooiis  witli  tiiis  funil.inipnta! 
change  in  the  political  adniinislration  of  the  iillairs 
of  Canada  was  another  of  equal  iinpoi  .  nee  in  ro- 
Bpect  to  lior  commercial  independence.  In  184(5, 
nn  act  of  Parliament  was  passed  giving  the  legis- 
lative authoriiy  of  the  British  colonies  the  right  to 
regulate  theii  own  duties  of  customs,  in  respect  to 
British  as  well  as  f(M'eign  products.  At  that  time 
there  were  no  duties  imposed  by  IJritish  acts  on 
British  goods  imported  into  Canada,  ullhougli 
there  were  duties  imposed  by  such  acts  on  for- 
eign goods;  but  there  were  acts  of  the  Canadian 
Legislature,  made  for  revenue,  imposing  additional 
or  cumulative  duties  on  foreign  goods,  and  a  duty 
of  five  per  cent,  on  IJritish  goods.  There  was 
also  an  act  of  Parliament  declaring  that  no  goods 
should,  "upon  imporlaiion  into  any  of  the  British 
posscsniona  in  America,  be  deemed  to  be  of  the 
growth,  production,  or  manufacture  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  unless  imported  from  the  United  King- 
dom." 

The  ed'ect  of  this  condition  of  the  law  was  to 
prevent  the  importation  of  British  goods  into  Can- 
ada througli  the  Uniied  States,  and  to  impose  on 
the  productions  of  the  United  States  and  otlier 
countries  duties  which  were  protective  as  to  those 
of  Great  Britain  and  Canada. 

As  early  as  1843  tlie  duty  on  the  importation  of 
■wheatand  Hour, of  the  growth  oflhe  Uniied  States, 
going  through  Canada  to  the  United  Kingdom, 
was  reduced  to  three  shillings  provincial  duty,  the 
quarter  of  eigiit  bushels,  and  one  shilling  British 
duty,  without  reference  to  the  slidingscale,  by 
which  the  importation  of  breadstnffs  from  other 
countries  was  regulated.  The  consequence  was, 
a  large  importatit)n  of  wheat  and  flour  from  the 
Uniied  States  into  England  through  Canada. 

The  corn  laws  being  repealed,  Canada  loses  this 
advantage — the  advantiige  of  being  a  carrier  for 
us — and  it  is  now  us  beneficial  to  export  Canadian 
wheat  to  England  through  the  Uiiited  States  (the 
expense  being  equal)  as  direct  from  Canada.  In 
other  words,  tiie  wheat  of  Canada  and  the  Uniied 
States  has  equal  advantages  in  the  British  market. 

In  1S47,  the  Parliamenlof  Canada,  acting  under 
the  authority  granted  by  the  Imperial  Ciovernmcnl, 
repealed  the  ditl'en  ntial  duties,  and  the  new  table 
or  tarifl"  of  duties  then  tnacicd  applies  equally  to 
goods  of  all  kinds,  whether  coming  from  England 
or  the  Uniied  States.  We  are,  in  this  respect, 
p'aued  on  the  fooling  of  the  m  jllicr  coiar.ry. 


This  equality  was  clTectcd  by  u  double  operation 
of  law:  first,  by  reducing  the  rate  of  duty  on  goods 
of  the  United  States;  and  secondly,  liy  increasing 
the  rate  on  British  goods,  thus  bringing  both  to 
the  same  standard  or  scale.  There  can  be  no 
belter  evidence  of  the  liberality  of  the  Canadians, 
and  of  their  earnest  desire  to  put  their  commercial 
intercourse  with  us  on  the  most  friendly  footing. 

The  consequenc"  *f  ihia  change  of  the  law  has 
been  to  create  a  considerable  importation  of  British 
and  foreign  goods  into  Canada  through  the  United 
States,  and  also  to  cause  a  large  im|)orlation  of  the 
productions  of  the  United  States  into  Canada  for 
consumption.  The  cotton  fabrics  of  Lowell  are 
received  on  the  same  terms  as  those  of  Manches- 
ter. Tlie  same  remark  is  true  of  many  other 
products  of  our  industry,  of  which  we  carry  large 
quantities  into  Canada  for  consumption.  Tlic 
valu»of  our  productions  annually  introduced  into 
Canada,  under  these  new  provisions  of  law,  is 
stated,  on  Itigh  authority,  to  airiount  to  more  than 
two  millions  of  dollars.  It  is  natural  that  the 
Canadians  should  desire  to  send  their  produce  to 
JN'ew  York  and  Boston,  to  meet  the  trade  which 
has  thus  been  opened  to  us — that  they,  having  put 
this  trade  upon  the  most  liberal  fooling  in  respect 
to  us,  should  wish  to  export,  on  eiiual  terms,  suoh 
means  of  payment  as  they  possess  in  the  products 
of  their  own  labor. 

Will  the  ter.r:s  of  exchange — perfect  equality — 
proposed  by  the  bill  be  disadvantageous  to  us?  I 
propose  to  consider  this  question  somewhat  in  de- 
tail, although  it  would  seem  but  fair  that  the  liber- 
ality which  has  been  manifested  by  Canada  towards 
us — u  liberality  by  which  we  have  greatly  profiled 
— a  liberality  voluntarily  extended  to  us,  without 
equivalent — should  be  reciprocated,  without  stop- 
[)ing  to  weigh,  with  over-scrupulous  exactness, 
the  precise  balance  of  advantages  and  benefits. 

In  the  first  place,  I  believe  it  will  be  apparent, 
by  looking  at  the  list  of  enumerated  articles  which 
are  proposed  to  be  mutually  received  free  of  duty, 
that  ashes,  flour,  and  lumber  arc  the  only  ones 
ever  likely  to  be  brought  into  tlie  markets  of  the 
United  Slates  in  considerable  quantities.  Ashes 
we  want,  and  at  the  cheapest  price.  In  respect  to 
lumlier,  there  is  nothing  to  be  apprehended.  We 
shall  unquestionably  receive  some  lumber  in  New 
York,  but  1  believe  our  limber  districts  do  not  fear 
ihe  competition.  Besides,  it  will  come  to  us  chiefly 
in  the  form  of  saw-logs  for  manufacture.  New 
York  is  almost  the  only  State  this  competition 
can  aflect;  an  \  if  there  is  any  risk,  we  are  will- 
ing to  take  it,  in  consideration  of  the  general 
advantage  and  convenience  the  measure  |)rom- 
ises  to  confer.    It  was  apprehended  by  our  friends 


i 


in  Maine,  that  their  interests  mi^ht  be  injuri- 
ously nlTcctcd  in  thid  respect.  But  the  hill  is  so 
Bhu|icd  us  to  nvoiil  nil  interference  with  them. 
It  np{)lic8  only  to  the  direct  trade  with  Cnniida. 
Articles  coming  through  New  Brunswick  or  the 
other  British  provinces  will  continue  on  the  old 
footing.  The  lumber  interest  in  Maine,  there- 
fore, will  not  be  touched  by  the  bill;  and  in  all 
other  reupccta  that  State  will  in  all  jirobability 
be  as  much  benefited  by  it  as  any  other.  When 
the  railway  between  Portland  and  Montreal  is 
completed,  the  free  commerce  secured  by  tlic  bill 
must  bo  of  the  greatest  advantage. 

Flour,  in  fact,  is  the  only  Canadian  product 
likely  to  come  into  competition  with  our  own.  Of 
all  thcoihers — animals,  hides, cheese, meats, &c. — 
we  shall  export  more  largely  into  Canada  than  she 
will  export  into  the  United  States.  The  same  re- 
mark is  applicable  to  corn,  and  indeed  to  most  if 
not  all  the  breadslufTs,  except  wheat. 

It  is  possible  that  in  certain  years — years  of 
scanty  production  in  the  United  States,  provided 
they  are  years  of  abundance  in  Canada — we  may 
receive  some  wheat  from  her.  But  I  do  not  believe 
that  the  amount  will  even  in  those  years  (which 
are  very  unlikely  to  occur)  be  sufficient  to  influ- 
ence prices  in  liie  United  States  in  a  perceptible 
degree.  If  the  importation,  however,  shall  in  such 
extraordinary  cases  prevent  the  price  of  grain  from 
becoming  extravagantly  high,  it  will  be  a  public 
benefit,  by  relieving  the  poor  from  the  necessity 
of  eating  dear  bread.  In  years  of  ordinary  abun- 
dance I  do  not  believe  prices  in  the  United  Slalca 


through  the  United  Stales  in  bond  under  the  act  of 
1840,  allowing  n  drawback  of  duties  in  certain 
cases.  It  enters  into  competition  with  ours  in 
those  markets  now.  The  bill  gives  no  now  facility 
or  advantage  in  this  respect,  except  to  relieve  licr 
from  custom-house  formalities.  I  hold,  then,  that 
the  wheat  of  Canada  ran  only  have  an  influence  on 
the  price  in  the  United  States  in  very  extraordinary 
years  not  likely  to  occur,  and  in  years  of  exporta- 
tion, by  competition  with  us  in  the  foreign  market, 
and  that,  in  the  latter  respect,  this  innuence  is  ai 
sensibly  felt  now  as  it  would  bo  under  the  pro- 
visions of  this  bill.  These  considerations  become 
the  more  significant  if  it  be  true,  as  I  suppose,  that 
wheat  is  henceforth  to  be  one  of  our  regular 
exports. 

What,  then,  are  the  advantages  to  be  expected 
from  the  proposed  free  interchange  of  products .' 
The  first  is,  to  relieve  the  inhabitants  of  both 
countries,  and  especially  those  on  the  frontier, 
from  the  inconvenience  of  the  custom-house  in 
respect  to  necessaries  of  common  production  ond 
daily  use.  The  next  is,  to  enable  the  Cana- 
dians to  export  their  produce  through  the  Uni- 
ted States  to  foreign  markets  without  paying 
duty  at  the  frontier,  and  with  a  deduction  of  two 
and  a  half  per  cent,  on  the  drawback  at  the  place 
of  exportation.  The  custom-house  formalities  seem 
to  have  been  a  great  obstacle  to  the  use  of  our 
canals  and  internal  channels  of  communication  by 
the  Canadians.  From  December  1, 18-lG,  to  July  1, 
IStl,  we  received  from  all  the  British  North  Ameri- 
can Provinces  !1Q!)  bushels  of  grain  of  all  kinds,  and 


will  be  at  all  afl'ected  by  the  importation  of  wheat  Ij  no  flour,  while  we  sent  them  more  than  two  mil- 
fiom  Canada.  The  production  of  wheat  in  llie  j  lions  of  busliels  of  wheat  during  the  year.  Du- 
United  States  yields  a  surplus.     Whenever  prices  I;  ring  ihe  previous  five  months  vvc  received  from  all 


abroad  are  suflicient  to  sustoin  exportation,  ou 
wheat  finds  its  way  to  foreign  markets;  and  in 
these  cases  it  is  the  price  in  those  markets  which 
iixes  the  price  at  home.  1  believe  it  may  be  stated 
as  a  principle  that  the  price  of  a  product,  which  is 
exported  in  any  considerable  quantity,  is  regulated 
in  the  markets  of  the  exporting  country  by  the 
price  in  the  markets  of  the  country  to  which  the 
export  is  made.  Our  own  experience  proves  the 
truth  of  this  proposition.  In  1847,  when  we  were 
exporting  breadsluffs,  the  price  of  flour  in  New 
York,  the  chief  port  of  exportation,  rose  and  fell 
with  the  fluctuations  of  price  in  the  British  market 
with  as  much  certainty  as  the  mercurial  column  in 
the  thermometer  rises  and  falls  with  the  variations 
of  external  temperature.  Tiiis  fact  should  relieve 
us  from  all  apprehension  as  to  the  influence  of  this 
bill  on  competition  with  Canada  in  the  production 
of  wheat.  She  may  send  her  flour  to  foreign 
markets  now,  cither  by   the  St.  Lawrence,   or 


the  rest  of  the  world  3U0  bushels  of  wheat  and  C4 
c\vt.  of  flour— equal  to  27  barrels.  The  last  year 
the  Canadians  have  used  our  canals  more  exten- 
sively. The  returns  are  not  yet  printed,  but  I 
understand  that  at  least  70,000  barrels  of  flour  have 
been  exported  through  the  United  States.  Whether 
the  experiment  will  succeed  remains  to  be  seen. 

Mr.  CLARKE.  Will  the  Senator  from  New 
York  state  where  he  obtained  this  information? 

Mr.  DIX.  I  have  ascertained  the  fact  from 
some  statistical  statements  published  in  a  newspa- 
per at  Oswego,  containing  the  transactions  at  the 
collector's  office.  This  information  is  given  in  an 
official  form  in  the  annual  report  on  commerce  and 
navigation  received  yesterday;  bull  have  not  been 
able  to  examine  it.  From  the  source  I  have  before 
referred  to,  I  learn  that  .}0,000  barrels  of  flour  were 
received  at  Oswego.  At  BulTalo  the  amount  was 
probably  less. 

The  bill  will  undoubtedly  lead  to  a  free  inter- 


8 


change  of  prodiiulx  aniuiij^tlie  rrontiur  iiiliubituntH. 
If,  in  llio  course  of  these  cxfhiins"' .,  wo  receive 
any  Canudii  wliciit  for  cotiMuni|>lii)n,  it  must  bo  in 
the  few  individual  cases  in  which  tho  sellers  of  our 
products  to  the  Canadians  are  able  to  consume  it 
more  freely.  To  a.  very  limited  extent  it  may 
possibly  reach  a  new  class  of  consumers,  who 
will  become  exporters  on  a  sniull  scale,  under  this 
bill.  For  instance,  one  of  our  frontier  inhubititnts 
who,  under  the  proposed  arrangement,  can  carry 
half  a  dozen  sheep  into  Canada  without  paying 
the  duly  of  forty  cents  n  head,  now  exacted  by 
the  Canadian  tarilT,  and  bring  back  as  many  bush- 
els of  wheat  without  paying  the  twenty  j)er  cent, 
duty  imposed  by  our  tarllT,  will  save  between  three 
and  four  dollars  in  an  exchange  of  products  of  the 
valueof  twelve  or  thirteen  dollars— a  monstrous  tax! 
— and  he  may  thus  be  enabled  to  eat  wheat  bread 
for  a  while,  instead  of  living  exclusively  on  the 
coarser  breadstuflVi.  This  must  be  the  only  cfTect  in 
ordinary  years,  when  wc  produce  more  wheat  than 
wc  require  for  our  own  consumption.  Wc  can  take 
none  from  other  countries,  unless  wc  consume  it 
more  freely;  and  our  increased  consumption  under 
this  bill  must  not  only  be  extremely  limited,  but 
of  such  a  nature  as  not  to  interfere  with  our  own 
production.  But  these  are  very  small  matters, 
Imrdly  wortiiy  to  be  taken  into  the  account  in  nn 
estimate  of  large  transactions. 

Let  mc  now  test  the  truth  of  my  poaiiion — that 
we  have  nothing  to  fear  from  com|)elition  with 
Canada  in  wheat-growing — by  a  resort  to  arith- 
inetical  demonstrations.  The  population  of  Can- 
ada is  about  half  the  population  of  New  York. 
That  part  of  the  jirovincc  which  was  once  politically 
known  as  Upper  Canada,  and  which,  for  distinc- 
tion, I  shall  still  call  ao,  is  the  wheat-growing  region. 
The  Lower  portion  does  not  produce  enough  for 
its  own  consumption.  It  always  draws  largely 
upon  the  Upper.  The  least  failure  of  the  crops  in 
the  Lower  would  be  sure  to  absorb  the  whole  sur- 
plus of  the  Upper.  If  there  were  any  just  ground  of 
apprehension  in  respect  to  our  wheat-growing  dis- 
tricts, looking  to  general  considerations,  it  would 
be  removed  by  the  custom-house  statistics  of  Can- 
ada for  the  year  1847 — thegreatyear  of  exportation 
for  American  breadstufls  by  reason  of  the  famine 
in  Europe.  1  take  for  illustration  the  most  unfa- 
vorable year  for  my  purpose — the  year  in  which, 
from  unu.sual  causes,  the  export  of  wheat  by  Can- 
ada was  greatest.  I  do  so  that  those  from  whom 
I  differ  may  have  every  advantage  they  can  ask  in 
the  argument.  The  quantity  of  flour  imported  in 
that  year  into  Canada  v/as  about  84,000  barrels, 
and  the  quantity  exported  about  C7C,000:  the 
quantity  of  wheat  imported  5G2,000  bushels,  and 


the  quantity  exported  0(18,000  bushels.  The  im- 
ports, of  course,  were  from  the  United  States. 
The  excess  of  exports  over  imports  was  ,V.li!,000 
barrels  of  flour,  and  lOG.OOO  bushels  of  wheat. 
This  entire  export  was  probably  to  Great  Ilrituin, 
her  American  islands,  and  her  Atlantic  provinces. 
Nova  Scotia  and  New  Brunswick.  Notwithstand- 
ing this  cxptirt  (if  flour  from  Canada,  New  Bruns- 
wick received  from  us,  in  the  snmo  year,  over 
100,000  barrels  of  flour,  and  Nova  Scotia  nearly  as 
much  more. 

The  result  of  my  inquiries  is,  that  in  ordinary 
years  the  upper  portion  of  Canada  produces  a  sur- 
plus of  about  2,000,000  bushels  of  wheat,  and  that 
a  considerable  part  of  this  surplus  is  consumed  by 
the  lower  portion,  including  Clucbec  and  Montreal, 
and  the  demands  for  their  shipping.  In  1847  Can- 
ada produced  4,500,907  bushels  of  wheat,  and  im- 
ported 982,408 bushels,  (including  flour,  and  estima- 
ting one  barrel  of  flour  to  be  equal  to  five  bu.ihels  of 
wheat,)  making  an  aggregate  of  5, 543, 43.1  bushels 
produced  and  im[iorted.  In  the  same  year  she  ex- 
ported 4,047,300  bushels,  making  a  balance  of 
1,490,00'J  bushels  consumed  ut  home.  This  is  less 
than  a  bushel  for  each  inhabitant — probably  not 
more  than  half  her  consumption  in  ordinary  year.? 
But  the  price  of  wheat  being  extravagantly  high, 
the  consumption  must  have  been  greatly  dimin- 
ished, for  the  purpose  of  exportation,  by  resorting 
to  the  coarser  grains  for  domestic  use.  The  statis- 
tical taljles  of  earlier  years  jirove  the  export  of  1847 
to  have  been  extraordinarily  large.  From  1838  to 
1843  the  annual  export  varied  from  50,000  to 
350,000  barrels;  but  in  this  last  amount  was  inclu- 
ded a  large  import  from  the  United  States.  It  is 
not  probable  that  her  export  is  essentially  different 
when  there  are  no  unusual  causes  to  stimulate  ex- 
portation. Taking  one  year  with  another,  and 
deducting  from  the  entire  export  of  w  heat  from 
Canada  an  amount  equal  to  that  which  wc  send  to 
her,  to  Nova  Scotia  and  to  Nev/  Brunswick,  and  I 
doubt  whether  there  will  be  much  of  a  balance 
left.  In  1847,  which  was  an  extraordinary  year, 
while  Canada  only  exported  3,004,898  busiiels  of 
wheat  over  her  imports,  we  carried  into  the  British 
North  American  Provinces  alone,  in  the  same  year, 
2,279,008  bushels.  While  Canada  produces  less 
than  three  bushels  of  wheat  for  each  inhabitant,  we 
produce  more  than  five  and  a  half  bushels  for  each 
inhabitant;  while  she  consumed  in  1847  less  than 
one  bushel  of  wheat  for  each  inhabitant,  we  con- 
sumed nearly  four  bushels  and  a  half  for  each 
inhabitant,  notwithstanding  the  temptation  of  high 
prices  to  export  and  to  consume  cheaper  bread- 
stuffs;  while  her  entire  product  of  wheat  in  1847 
was  four  millions  and  a  half  of  bushels,  ours  was 


1 


_^ 9  __  _      ■ 

ov.  r  on.' liiindriHl  iinfl  fourteen  millioni  of  bunheli.  jjproducta  ngninat  ui.  But  tho  mcMure  will,  In 
Au;niiiHlMn  rxportof  I«-h.s  timn  six  hundrril  thou-  '  truth,  be  of  infinite  ndvnnlnge  to  our  iiKricuiture. 
•and  burrcis  of  flour  from  Cnnndu  in  IHI7,  (h»r  Canndn  sfinda  few  produrm  to  u«;  w.i  Rmd  many 
excess  over  imports,)  -f  exported  nrnriy  fournnd  ||  to  her.  We  produce  corn,  which  she  needs,  and 
a  half  milhons  of  I     •  N;  nnd  n^ninst  nn  export ;  which  she  cnnnot  raise  in  sufficient  rpmntity  for 


of  one  hundred  thousand  bushels  of  wheat  from 
Cunndn,  (excess  over  imports,)  we  exported  nearly 


her  own  consumption.     Ifer  winters  arc  longer 
tImn  ours;  nnd,  ns  the  expense  of  keepin;;:  cattle 


four  millions  four  hundred  ihousurul  bushels.     In  !  from  autumn  to  spring  i.<i  greater,  she  will  always 

the  same  year  we  exported  twenty  million  busheh 

of  Indian  corn  nnd  meal,  while  she  exported  none. 

The  idea  that  a  million  and  n  half  of  people,  about 

half  the  population  of  New  York,  with  a  soil  far 

less  favorable  to  tho  growth  of  wheat  than  our 

own,  can  successflilly  compete  with  us  cither  in 

the  foreign  or  the  domestic  market,  and  injuriously 


affect  produciion  with  us,  with  twenty  milliona  of  '  to  be  of  infinite  benefit  to 


rely  on  us  for  her  supplies,  both  for  the  slaughter- 
house and  for  farming  purposes.  There  is  now 
a  duty  of  $4  40  a  head  on  cows,  and  seven  dol- 
lars a  head  on  oxen,  on  importation  into  Canada, 
The  removal  of  these  duties  will  be  a  great  ad- 
vantage to  us.  In  short,  under  nil  its  nspects, 
this  measure  will,  on  examination,  be  admitted 


people,  seems  to  mo  a  very  idle  apprehension.  It 
has  been  stated,  on  hiirh  authority,  that  the  entire 
trade  of  the  Ibitish  North  American  colonies,  with 
three  millions  of  people,  docs  not  equal  that  of  Con- 
necticut, with  only  three  hundred  thousand  inhabi- 
tants. The  more  nuitierous, active, and  enterprising 
must  always  have  the  advantage  in  exchanging  on 
equal  terms.  The  very  fact  ihut  we  send  into  New 
Brunswick  every  year  at  least  ono  hundred  thou- 
sand barrels  of  flour,  and  prolml)ly  as  large  an 
air-vunt  into  Nova  Scotin,  seems  to  indicot'  that 
we  might  enter  into  successful  competition  with 
Upper  in  supplying  Lower  Canada,  if  all  duties 
were  to  be  removed.  At  least  our  surpluses  will, 
to  some  extent,  meet  there. 

Looking  to  the  wheat  culture  alone,  therefore,  1 
should  have  no  fears.  But  if  we  consider  the  sub- 
ject in  connection  with  the  export  of  cattle,  corn, 


our  agriculture.     It  will, 


m  most  cases,  remove  duties  on  our  products, 
which  operate  os  a  direct  discouragement  to  their 
exportation,  while  the  removal  of  the  duties  on  the 
like  articles  of  the  production  of  Cimada  cannot 
alTect  us,  as  those  duties  are  chiefly  on  products 
which  will  not  come  into  competition  with  ours,  nnd 
are  therefore  not  protective  In  a  word,  I  can  fancy 
no  meosure  more  likely  to  ite  beneficial  to  our  ag- 
riculture than  this.  The  highest  sjiecies  of  protec- 
tion to  industry  is  that  which  opens  new  markets 
for  it.s  products.  In  this  point  of  view  this  measure 
h  eminently  protective;  it  is  just,  leiritimate,  effect- 
ive protection;  and  if  gentlemen  desire  (ns  I  have 
no  doubt  they  do)  to  advance  the  agricultural  in- 
terests of  the  country,  they  ought  to  sustain  it. 

Let  me  now  state  a  few  further  statistical  facts 
to  the  Senate,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  how 
little  influence  any  increased  interchange  of  prod- 


salted  meats,  and  other  articles,  there  can  be  no  J!  ucts  with  Canada  under  this  bill  is  likely  to  have  on 


reasonable  ground  to  apprehend  that  we  shall  be 
losers.  We  must  be  gainers.  Large  quantities 
of  cattle  and  corn  are  now  exported  to  Canada, 
with  a  specific  duty,  equal  to  about  twenty  per 
cent,  against  them.  We  sent  into  Canada  in  1844 
thirteen  thousand  barrels  of  pork,  and  in  1847 
about  the  same  quantity,  with  a  specific  duty  of 
one  dollar  and  twenty  cents  the  cwt.  against  us. 
The  removal  of  these  duties  cannot  but  have  a 
most  decided  influence  in  increasing  the  traffic  of 
the  northwestern  States  with  Canada. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  proposed  measure, 
by  removing  the  duties  on  the  enumerated  products, 
will  destroy  the  protection  which  thosv,  luties  se- 
cure to  our  agricultural  industry.  The  answer  to 
this  suggestion  is,  that  the  proposed  arrrnngement 
is  founded  upon  a  mutual  abolition  of  duties,  and 
that  the  protection  extended  to  like  articles  of  the 
production  of  Canada  will  also  be  removed.  There 


our  aggregate  exchanges  with  foreign  countries. 

The  duties  on  merchandise  collected  in  all  the 
inland  frontierdistricts,  commencing  at  Burlington, 
on  Lake  Champlain,  and  terminating  at  Chicago, 
on  Lake  Michigan,  are  as  follows: 

For  1845 f.')7,8]8  .55 

Forl84G 66,8i>8  80 

For  1847 6(i,019  80 

Making  an  average  of  g(!3,555  71  per  annum  for 
the  three  years. 

Estimating  the  rate  of  duty  at  33  J  per  cent.,  the 
whole  value  of  the  articles  imported  from  Canada 
into  the  United  States,  and  paying  duty  at  the  cus- 
tom-houses, averages  §190,007  13  per  annum.  A 
portion  of  the  duties  was,  in  all  probability,  re- 
funded in  1847  under  the  law  allowing  a  drawback 
on  reexportation  of  the  articles,  on  which  the  duties 
were  paid.  1  learn  that  the  amount  of  goods  en- 
tered at  Buffalo  and  Oswego  for  the  benefit  of 


can  be   no  necessity  of  protecting  our  products  ,  drawback  was  greatly  increased  during  the  last 
against  Canada,  when  she  ceases  to  protect  her  •'.  year,  as  the  returns,  when  we  receive  them,  will 


10 


undoubtedly  show;  but  the  amount  refunded  will 
be  prnportioimhly  increased,  so  tliat  the  treasury 
will  not  be  ofTected  by  the  augmented  collections 
from  this  cause. 

Our  entire  imports  from  the  Eritish  North  Amer- 
ican colonies  in  ]  84  j  were  of  the  value  of  about  two 
millions  of  dollars.  Of  this  amount  more  than  nine 
hundred  thousand  dollars  consisted  of  gold  and 
silvt. ,  and  more  than  eleven  hundred  thousand, 
including  specie,  were  free  of  duty.  Tiie  remain- 
ing: "i'le  hundred  thousanddollarsare  to  be  divided 
between  Canada,  Nova  Scotia,  and  New  Bruns- 
wick; and  from  the  nature  of  the  articles  it  is  man- 
ifest that  the  quantity  received  from  Canada  was 
but  a  small  portion  of  the  amount.  For  instance, 
fish  constituted  nearly  four  hundred  thousand  dol- 
lars cf  the  nine  hundred  thousand;  and  this  came 
from  the  Atlantic  proving  jS.  The  year  J 847  gives 
nearly  the  same  aggrej'ate  result.  Our  entire  im- 
ports from  all  the  Critish  North  American  colonies 
constitute  a  very  inconsiderable  part  of  our  com- 
mercial transactions  witli  foreign  States;  and  no 
change  we  can  make  in  our  intercourse  with  Can- 
ada can  have  any  material  infiuence  upon  them. 

Notwithstanding  this  sr  11  import  from  the 
British  North  American  colonies,  our  commercial 
intercourse  with  them,  including  Canada,  is  as 
beneficial  for  its  extent  as  that  with  any  portion  of 
tlif;  world.  We  sent  into  them  in  1847,  products 
of  the  value  of  nearly  eight  millions  of  dollars— 
about  five  million  eight  hundred  thousand  domes- 
tic, and  over  two  millions  foreign.  The  foreign 
exports  were  probably,  to  a  great  extent,  sent 
through  the  United  States  on  foreign  account. 
Our  imports  directly  from  those  colonies,  the 
same  year,  were  of  the  value  of  about  two  mil- 
lions and  a  quarter.  The  remaining  five  miUions 
and  a  half  (deducting  some  hundred  thousand 
on  foreign  account)  must  have  been  paid  by  bills 
on  England.  A  large  portion  of  our  exports  into 
Canada  is  probably  paid  for  in  this  way.  She 
sends  her  lumber  and  flour  to  England, and  with  the 
proceeds  pays  us  the  excess  of  her  imports  from 
us  over  her  exports  to  us. 

But  it  is  only  a  small  portion  even  of  these  ex- 
changes which  this  bill  can  afiect.  It  is  only  that 
portion  which  embraces  the  enumerated  articles. 
Now,  I  have  ascertained  that  in  1847  we  did  not 
import  of  those  articles  from  all  tlie  British  North 
American  c^Jonies  nn  amount  equal  in  value  to  one 
hundred  thousand  dollars.  T'rom  Canada  it  must 
have  l)cen  quite  inconsiderable.  The  intercourse 
this  bill  is  destined  to  affjct  is,  therefore,  not  only 
limited  in  its  extent,  bat  it  is  essentially  local  in 
its  character.  No  apprehension  is  expressed  in 
any  quarter  as  to  its  piacticul  operation,  excepting 


;  aa  respects  competition  in  the  production  of  wheat. 

I  I  trust  I  have  shown  that  even  this  apprehension 

I  ia  without  foundation.    But  if  it  were  not  so,  the 

States  on  the  frontier  arc  those  most  likely  to  feel 

the  i'lfluence  of  the  competition       Ohio   is  the 

largest  wheat-growing  State  in  the  Union.     She 

produces  a  little  less  than  seventeen  millions  of 

j  bushels — nearly  foui'  times  as  much  as  Canada. 

i  Next  in  order  is  New  York,  with  a  product  of 

fourteen  millions  and  a  half  of  bushels — more  than 

■  three  limes  as  much  as  Canada.    Michigan,  in 

1847,  with  a  population  not  one-fourth  of  that  of 

Canada,  produced  nearly  twice  as  many  bushels 

I  of  wheat.     These  are  the  States  which   should 

;  object  to  the  free  exchange  proposed  by  the  bill, 

if  objection  could  reasonably  be  made  in  anyquar- 

\  ter;  and  yet  they  are  the  .ery  States  in  which  the 

i  measure  is  most  earnestly  desired.     It  is,  in  truth, 

I  a  measure  which  exclusively  concerns  the  inhab- 

,  itants  of  the  frontier;  and  1  -earnestly  hope  Sena- 

I  tors  representing  States  w  'ich  are  fur  removed 

from  it,  and  which  cannot  be  affected  by  the  pro- 

'  posed  measure,  will  consent  that  the  wishes  of  the 

parties  immediately  interested  shall   furnish  the 

!  rule  of  their  intercourse  with  each  other. 

:      1  havb  endeavored  to  show,  Mr.  F.esident,  that 

the  Canadian  Government  has  acted  with  great 

i  liberality  towards  us;   and    that  by  reciprocally 

',  removing  the  duties  on  the  agricultural  produc- 

;  tions  of  both  countries  enumerated  in  this  bill,  we 

'  do  no  injury  to  any  interest,  but  create  a  mutual 

benefit. 

I      I  was  very  much  surprised  to  hear  tl  •"  Senator 

,  from  Maryland  [Mr.  Pearce]  say  that  there  wos 

,  no  reciprocity  in  the  proposed  arrangement;  that 

;  "  the  bill  is  delusive.     If  it  pass,  no'  a  dollar's 

:  worth  of  any  of  these  products  will  be  exported 

from  the  United  States  to  Canada.'-    The  Senator 

could  not  have  examined  this  subject  with  his 

accustomed  care.    Let  me  convince  him  that  he 

:  has  not  done  so.     In  1S47  we  exported  to  Canada 

I  83,983  barrels  of  flour,  and  562,553  bushels  of 

}i  wheat,  with  a  duty  of  about  seven  and  a  half  cents 

a  bushel  on  the  importation;  we  also  sent  her  G4,378 

>  bushels  of  other  grains. 

I      Mr.  PEARCE.     I  will  thank  the  Senator  to 

state  whence  he  derives  his  information.   I  do  not 

find  it  in  the  public  documents. 

j      Mr.  DIX.   I  have  obtained  the  information  from 

the  custom-house  statistics  of  Canada,  to  which  I 

'  have  referred,  furnished  at  my  request  by  the  ofli- 

I  cers  of  the  Canadian  Government. 

I      We  also  sent  into  Canada  943,280  pounds  of 

tallow,  with  a  duty  of  one  per  cer.t.,  (the  very 

large  export  probably  K-sulting  from  the  very  low 

duty;)   y8,UU0  pounds  of  butter,  with  a  duty  of 


1 


(9 


i 


\ 


11 


p  50  per  cwt.;  ],458  oxen,  with  a  duly  of  $7  a 
head;  14,701  bushels  of  potatoes,  with  a  duty  of 
ten  per  cent.;  49,099  busliels  of  apples,  with  a 
duty  of  ten  cents  per  bushel;  1C,S09  barrsia  of 
salted  meats,  chiefly  pork,  with  a  duty  of  $1  20 
the  cwt. 

The  duty  on  sheep  is  nearly  prohibitory.  It  is. 
Fit  ordinary  prices,  forty  per  cent.  Nearly  the  same 
may  be  said  of  the  duty  on  most  other  animal.s 


siderit  proper  to  notice,  though  I  regret  to  be  under 
j  the  necessity  of  making  any  reference  to  it.  The 
j  Senator  from  Virginia  [Mr.  Humter]  terms  this  bill 
a  measure  '*  of  quasi  annexation,  because  tlie  ad- 
'  vantages  which  are  urged  as  arising  from  it  seem  to 
'  relate  to  some  such  project  in  the  future."  Mr. 
President,  if  this  measure  had  any  such  olijcct,  wc 
might  reasonably  count  upon  the  support  of  the 
Senator  from  Virginia,  if  there^were  no  other 
ground  of  objection.     It  is  but  fiur  years  since 


Now,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say,  that  the  export  of 

most  of  the  enumerated  products  may  be  very  jj  every  Democratic  vote  in  this  body  from  the  north- 
greatly  increased  by  the  removal  of  the  dutiesupon  j!  cm,  northeastern,  and  northwestern  States  was 
them;  and  1  am  satisfied  ,hat  the  Senator  from  ,;  cast  for  the  annexation  of  Texas.  If  Canada 
Maryland  will  find,  on  a  mo-e  careful  examination   I  should  desire  to  unite  herself  to  us,  are  we  not  to 


of  the  sul)ject,  that  he  has  er.tirely  misapprehe.'7'.led 
the  operation  of  the  bill  upon  the  agriculturid  in- 
terest of  the  country. 

And  now  I  wish  to  notice,  in  the  briefest  man- 
ner, the  amendment  proposed  by  the  Senator  from 
Vermont,  [Mr.  Phelps.]  The  elTect  of  the  amend- 
ment, if  adopted,  must  be  to  defeat  the  measure. 
It  cannot  be  accepted  by  Canada.  The  articles  the 
amendment  proposes  to  make  reciprocally  free  are 
hata,   boots,   shoes,   and   other  manufactures  of 
k-tiier;  cotton  and  woollen  fabrics.   These  are  all  j 
manufactured  articles.    The  bill  contemplates  a  I 
free  excliange  of   certain   agricultural   products.  ' 
The  amendment  changes  the  whole  character  ofj 
the  bill.  It  extends  to  a  class  of  imports  on  which 


expect  the  same  unanimity  among  our  Democratic 
friends  in  anotlier quarter?  or  are  we  to  understand 
thcit  annexation  is  only  to  be  countenanced  when 
it  can  oe  made  at  one  extremity  of  the  Union,  and 
to  be  opposed  at  the  other? — that  even  freedom  of 
intercourse  is  to  be  discouraged  and  repelled,  be- 
cause it  may  by  possibility  lead  to  such  a  result  in 
the  future?  I  hope  the  intimation  of  the  Senator 
from  Virginia  is  not  to  be  so  understood.  If  it  is, 
it  is  well  that  we  know  now  in  what  manner  our 
cooperation  in  the  annexation  of  Texas  and  the 
acquisition  of  Florida  is  likely  to  be  reciprocated. 
Mr.  HUiN'TER.  The  gentleman  from  New 
York  is  mistaken  if  he  supposes  I  urged  this  view 
of  the  bill  as  an  objection  to  it.     I  slated  the  fact 


Canada  must  rely  for  revenue.     It  would  be  just  ,;  without  comment  on  it,  or  intimating  either  an 
as  unreasonable  in  her  to  ask  us  to  receive  Jier  |  approval  or  condemnation  of  it.     I  said  that  such 


furs  free  of  duty. 


must  be  its  purpose,  for  that  the  best  arguments 


But  the  duties  on  these  articles,  though  revenue  |  urged  in  its  favor  seemed  to  be  based  upon  some 
duties,  are  exceedingly  moderate.  They  come  j!  such  prospect  in  the  future, 
within  the  range  of  those  proposed  by  General  '\  Mr.  DIX.  I  am  aware  that  the  Senator  did  not 
Hamilton  in  his  celebrated  report  on  manufactures  |:  comment  upon  the  intimation  he  made,  though  I 
made  shortly  after  the  organization  of  the  Federal  j'  understood  him  to  make  it  by  way  of  objection  to 
Government.  Tlie  duty  on  hats  is  1^  percent.;  on  ,  the  bill.     But  I  am  happy  that  he  does  not  wish  it 


boots,  shoes,  and   manufactures  of  leather  of  all 


to  be  so  received.  While  on  thissubject,  I  desire  to 


kinds,  an  average  duty,  I  think,  not  exceeding  10  :  say,  that  so  tar  as  I  am  concerned,  so  f\ir  as  con- 
percent.;  and  on  manufactures  of  cotton  and  woid  cerns  those  with  whom  this  measure  originated,  no 
11  per  cent.  These  duties  are  not  only  moderate,  \\  such  design  was  even  imagined  until  it  was  sug- 
but  low;  and  without  reference  to  the  departure  of  !|  gested  by  those  to  whom  it  seems  to  be  unaccept- 
the  amendment  from  the  general  policy  of  the  bill,  |;  able.  I  believe  (though  I  am  not  sure)  this  prop- 
it  IS  unreasonable  to  ask  their  abolition.  jj  osition  came  originally   from  Canada-from  the 

Besides,  the  same  duties  are  imposed  on  like  j.  liberal  party  in  Canada-though  it  was  cordially 
products  of  British  maimli,cture.  The  mother  \  acquiesced  in  on  our  side  by  those  who  supposed 
country  has  no  advantage  over  us  in  this  respect  j  ihey  had  a  direct  interest  in  it.  Among  the  first 
in  Canada,  mid  we  ought  not  to  ask  an  advantage  !  by  whom  it  was  publicly  suggested,  if  I  remem- 
°^'^''  ''^'■-  |i  ber  right,  was  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.     He 

It  is  quite  manifest  that  the  amendment  musi  jj  has  twice  recommended  it;  and  undoubtedly  be- 
defcat  the  bill;  and  I  entreat  Senators  not  to  give  []  cause  he  regarded  it  as  a  commercial  arrangement 
it  their  support.     If  the  bill  is  not  acceptable  to  :|  which  would  be  beneficial  to  both  parties.  " 
them,  I  trust  they  will,  at  least,  consent  to  mam-  |j      I  know  personally  many  of  the  prominent  men 
f(!si  ilmir  onn.KsJtion  to  it  by  a  dire.L  vote.  l!  in  Canaila.     I  know  they  are  strongly  opposed  lo 

1  nowcomeloanolijcctiontothebill  wliichlcon-  ;  a  separation  from   the  mother  country.     They 


12 


desire  uninnwilh  England  first,  indopendonce  next, 
annexation  to  the  United  States  last  of  all.  They 
desire  a  free  exchange  of  products  with  ua,  be- 
cause they  believe  the  existing  restrictions  upon  our 
commerce  are  prejudicial  to  both  countries;  and 
they  desire  nothing  more.  What  the  feeling  is 
with  the  great  body  of  the  people  in  Canada,  I 
have  no  means  of  knowing.  Tliat  they  desire  free 
intercourse  with  us,  there  is  no  doubt.  Beyond 
that,  I  know  nothing  of  their  opinions  or  wishes. 

For  myself,  I  have  heretofore  spoken  freely  on 
this  subject.  1  would  neither  be  forward  ir.  court- 
ing the  annexation  of  adjacent  States,  nor  back- 
Ward  in  acceding  to  it.  I  would  neither  make 
overtures  nor  repel  them,  without  good  cause.  I 
believe  we  are  large  enough  for  all  the  purposes  of 
security  and  strength;  but  I  do  not  fear  further  ex- 
tension, nor  would  I  decline  it  when  circumstances 
render  it  convenient  to  ourselves  or  others. 

Mr.  Prej^idcni,  this  consideration  has  been  urged, 
and  urg(d  directly,  as  an  objection  to  commercitd 
freedom  between  the  United  States  and  Canada.  I 
have  rcccniiy  heard  it  from  the  anti-liberal  party 
in  Canada,  who  are  for  new  restrictions  on  our 
commerce.  They  are  in  favor  of  existing  restric- 
tions as  well  as  new  one.s,  upon  the  ground  that 
free  intercouse  may  lead  to  a  political  union  be- 
tween Canada  and  the  United  States.  The  Board 
of  Trade  in  Montreal,  in  a  petition  to  t!ie  Queen, 
on  the  18th  December  last,  prayed  for  a  renewal 
of  the  discriminating  duty  on  American  grain  in 
favor  of  colonial  grain;  and  one  of  the  reasons  as- 
signed was,  that  the  recent  changes  in  the  commer- 
cial relations  of  Canada  had  led  to  "a  growing 
•commercial  intercourse  with  the  United  States, 
'  giving  rise  to  an  opinion,  which  is  daily  gaining 
'  ground  on  both  sides  of  the  boundary  line,  that 
'  the  interests  of  the  two  countries,  under  the 
'  changed  policy  of  the  Imperial  Government,  are 
'  germane  to  each  other,  and  under  that  system 
•  must  sooner  or  later  be  politically  interwoven." 

Whether  this  view  be  just  or  not,  I  do  not  be- 
lieve the  result  is  to  be  defeated  in  either  of  the 
modes  proposed— by  a  contmuation  of  existing 
restrictions,  or  by  the  imposition  of  new  ones.  I 
believe  the  tendency  of  such  measures  will  be  to 
hasten  and  to  consummate  the  very  end  th(y  are 
intended  to  defeat.  Let  us  see  if  it  be  not  so.  A 
man  at  Champlain,  New  York,  or  Swanton,  Ver- 
mont, wishes  to  sell  an  ox  to  his  neighbor  in  Can- 
ada, living  in  siglit  of  him,  and  take  wheat  in  ex- 
change. On  making  his  entry  at  the  Canadian 
custom  house,  lie  is  taxed  $7  on  the  importation 
of  his  ox.  He  brings  back  thirty-five  bushels 
of  wheat,  at  $1  a  bushel,  and,  on  entering  them 
at  our  custom-house,  he  is  taxed  20  per  cent,  ad 


valorem,  (•J7  more,)— fourteen  dollars  tax  to  the 
two  Governments  for  the  privilege  of  exchanging  his 
commodity  with  his  neighbor,  separated  from  him 
in  one  case  by  a  narrow  sheet  of  water,  and  in  the 
other  by  an  astronomical  line.  Now,  I  venture  to 
assert  that  these  impositions  will  not  long  be  sub- 
mitted to  on  either  side;  and  if  they  are  not  re- 
moved by  the  two  Governments,  the  inhabitants 
of  both  countries  will  look  to  annexation  as  the 
only  practicable  measure  of  relief.  Sir,  a  liberal 
policy  is  always  the  most  wise  as  well  as  the  most 
just;  and,  I  say  again,  that  the  people  of  the  two 
countries  will  not  submit  to  such  a  sys'em  as  I 
have  described — a  system  executed  by  an  army 
of  custom-house  officers  on  each  side  of  the  bound- 
ary line,  placed  there  to  enforce  exactions  which 
absolutely  prohibit  commercial  intercourse,  or  to 
fill  their  bags  of  plunder  out  of  the  hard  earnings 
of  the  frontier  inhabitants.  And  I  cannot  believe 
that  those  who  advocate  the  doctrines  of  free  trade 
will  sustain  a  state  of  things  so  utterly  at  variance 
with  their  own  principles;  that  the"  will  be  found 
acting  in-unison  with  the  anti-liberal  party  in  Can- 
ada, upholJing  commercial  restrictions,  which  do 
no  good,  against  commercial  freedom,  which  works 
no  injury;  throwing  impediments  in  the  paths  of 
those  who  are  marked  out  by  the  great  features  of 
the  districts  they  inhabit  for  friendly  intercourse, 
and  creating  these  embarrassments  for  the  avowed 
purpose  of  making  them  alien  to  each  other. 

Notwithstanding  the  opinion  of  the  Senator  from 
Maryland,  there  is  another  consideration  in  favor 
of  this  bill  which  I  consider  of  vital  importance  to 
us.  We  have  earnestly  desired,  since  the  Ameri- 
can Revolution,  the  free  navigation  of  the  St.  Law- 
rence. In  18:36  it  became  the  subject  of  diplomatic 
correspondence  between  the  two  countries.  The 
discussion  exhibits  the  high  value  we  have  attached 
to  this  privilege.  Indeed,  we  claimed  it  as  a  right; 
and  it  was  asserted  as  such  by  Mr.  Clay  in  a  letter 
of  great  power  and  eloquence.  The  right  was  not 
admitted  by  Great  Britain,  and  the  matter  was 
dropped.  Bit  there  has  been  no  period  when  we 
would  not  have  been  willing  to  grant  an  equiva- 
lent for  a  privilege  in  which,  according  to  Mr. 
Clay,  nine  States  have  an  interest.  Canada  is  now 
desirous  of  granting  it  without  equivalent.  She 
stands  ready  to  pass  a  bill  opening  the  free  naviga- 
tion of  the  St.  Lawrence  to  our  vessels.  Her  Par- 
liament is  in  session.  The  liberal  party,  which  is 
now  in  power,  is  about  to  bring  the  measure  for- 
ward; and  1  am  happy  to  say  that  Lord  Elgin,  the 
Governor — a  gentleman  distinguished  for  an  en- 
lightened and  liberal  statesmanship — is  in  favor  of 
the  measure.  Its  success  is  certain,  if  we  do  not 
decline  the  reciprocity  atked  for  by  this  bill. 


13 


When  the  Senator  from  Maryland  said  that  the 
navigation  of  the  St.  Lawrence  was  useless  to  us, 
he  could  hardly  have  been  aware  that  ship  canals 
have  been  constructed  around  the  fulls  of  Niagara, 
and  other  points  below,  to  connect  the  great  lakes 

with  thcAtlanticOcean  by  way  of  theSt.  Lawrence, 
and  that  vessels  of  three  hundred  and  fifty  tons  pass 
freely  through  these  internal  channels  of  commu- 
nication. During  the  last  summer,  two  of  our  reve-  ! 
nue  vessels  passed  from  Lake  Erie  and  Lake  On- 
tario, through  the  St.  Lawrence,  to  the  Atlantic. 
When  our  ships  can  go  to  Quebec  by  sea  and 
meet  vessels  from  our  northwestern  Slates,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  large  quantities  of  the  prod- 
ucts of  those  States  will  be  carried,  in  summer, 
spring,  and  autumn,  in  this  direction  by  our  own 
vessels  to  Europe.  If  this  bill  becomes  a  law,  I 
have  no  hesitation  in  predicting  that  vessels  at  no 
distant  day  will  be  laden  with  wheat  in  Chicago, 
Green  Bay,  Detroit,  and  Cleveland,  and  unlade'in 
Liverpool.  Ship-owners,  producers,  all  will  be 
greatly  benefited  by  this  free  commerce,  which 
will  have  an  advantage  in  avoiding  transhipment 
between  the  point  of  embarkation  and  the  sea,  or 
the  foreign  market.  If  the  result  is  to  affect  in  any 
way  producers  in  the  Middle  States,  as  Kentucky  in 
the  West,  and  Maryland  and  Virginia  on  the  At- 
lantic, It  will  be  to  relieve  them  from  competition  in 
our  own  markets  with  the  wheat-growers  of  Ohio, 
Illinois,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin;  and  I  greatly 
err  if  gentlemen  from  the  wheat^rowing  States  do 
not  find  themselves  acting  in  direct  contravention 
of  the  interests  of  their  constituents  in  opposing 
this  measure.  In  any  point  of  view  under  which 
the  subject  can  be  considered,  the  opening  of  the 
St.  Lawrence  will  be  of  incalculable  benefit.  It 
is,  indeed,  the  only  outlet  of  the  Northwest  to  the 
sea  for  vessels  of  any  magnitude— the  only  outlet 
of  this  kind  they  can  ever  have;  for  with  all  the 
facilities  for  internal  communication  New  York 
possesses,  a  ship-canal  through  her  territory  is 
opposed  by  physical  obstacles  too  serious  to  be 
overcome. 

I  believe  the  adoption  of  this  great  measure— the 
free  navigation  of  the  St.  Lawrence— depends  on 
the  passage  of  this  bill.  If  the  reciprocity  it  pro- 
vides for  is  refused,  we  cannot  expect  that  Canada 
will  grant  ua  what  she  considers  as  a  boon,  what 
we  claim  as  a  right,  and  what  all  must  concede  to 
be  a  privilege  of  inestimable  value.  On  the  con- 
trary, if  the  liberal  course  she  has  pursued  is  met 
by  an  illiberal  spirit  in  us,  I  fear  she  will  be  com- 
pelled, in  se'f-defence,  to  resort  to  her  old  system 
of  differential  duties,  and  to  continue  the  restric- 
tion on  navigation.  ThtiP  is  a  strong  party  in 
Canada  in  favor  of  this  course.    I  have  already 


alluded  to  the  anti-liberal  party.     I  have  quoted 
their  recent  petition  to  the  Queen  in  favor  of  dis- 
criminating duties  on  our  products.     And,  sir,  I 
greatly  fear,  if  this  bill  is  defeated,  that  we  shall 
put  a  weapon  into  their  hands  to  be  wielded  to 
our  serious  annoyance  and  injury.     To   with- 
hold, therefore,  a  just  measure  of  reciprocity,  as  I 
verily  believe,  of  mutual  advantage  to  both  parties, 
would  not  only  be  exceedingly  narrow  in  policy 
on  our  part,  but,  like  all  sellLdiness,  it  would  de- 
j  feat  itself,  and  result  in  a  loss  of  benefits  we  already 
I  enjoy.    These  benefits,  as  I  have  already  shown, 
,  are— first,  'equal  duties  in  Canada  on   American 
j  and  British  goods;  and  second,  a  market  for  at 
least  three  millions  of  dollars  in  value  of  the  prod- 
i  ucts  of  our  industry. 

j  Mr.  DAYTON.  Will  the  Senator  allow  me  to 
j  interrupt  him?  The  statement  of  facts  he  makes  ia 
i  important;  and  I  desire  to  know  on  what  authority 
i  he  says  that  our  manufactured  articles  are  received 
:  in  Canada  on  the  same  terms  as  those  of  Great 
J  Britain. 

1  Mr.  DIX.  I  state  it  on  the  authority  of  the 
Canadian  tariff",  which  I  shall  be  happy  to  show 
the  Senator  from  New  Jersey;  and  I  will  add 
that  large  quantities  of  our  manufactures  are  car- 
ried into  Canada  for  consumption— iron  castings, 
coarse  cottons,  and  a  variety  of  articles  sent  from 
the  New  England  States,  New  Jersey ,  and  Pennsyl- 
vania. To  these  States  the  increased  intercourse 
proposed  by  this  bill  will  be  of  great  importance. 
The  prospective  benefit  (which  we  should  reject 
by  a  narrow  policy)  is  the  free  navigation  of  the 
St.  Lawrence— one  of  the  highest  prizes  offered 
to  the  commercial  enterprise  of  the  country  for 
many  years.  It  will  also  carry  with  it  the  appli- 
cation, which  we  have  always  contended  for,  of 
a  principle  of  the  greatest  value  in  international 
intercourse— a  principle  generally  conceded  in  Eu- 
rope,since  the  report  of  Baron  Von  Humboldt— the 
right  of  riparian  States  to  an  outlet  to  the  sea  by 
the  water-courses  on  which  they  border.  These 
seem  to  me  to  be  advantages  which  far  outweigh 
in  im[iortante  anjj  considerations  of  pecuniary 
profit  to  be  drawn  from  a  ciose  computation  of 
the  number  of  bushels  of  wheat  which  may  be 
reciproci'iv  received  and  exported;  though,  even 
on  this  narrow  ground,  I  trust  I  have  shown  that 
we  are  not  likely  to  be  losers  by  the  competition. 

There  is  another  view  of  the  subject  which,  I  con- 
fess, weighs  greatly  with  me.  The  liberal  party  in 
Canada  has  been  struggling  for  years  to  obtain  the 
measure  of  political  and  commercial  freedom  to 
which  they  believe  every  community  of  men  to 
be  fair.v  entitled.  Commercial  freedom  they  have 
secured— not  fully,  but  so  far  as  to  give  them  the 


14 


regulation  of  the  impost:  political  freedom,  so  far 
as  to  give  the  popular  voice  a  control  over  all  car- ; 
dinal  subjects  of  internal  administration  and  ex- 
ternal intercourse.     The  f^rst  use  they  have  made 
of  this  partial  independence  of  the  mother  country  I 
is  to  tender  to  us  the  most  liberal  terms  of  com- 1 
mercial  exchange.    They  have  extended  to  us 
these  benefits  without  equivalent.     "We  have  en- ' 
joyed  them  for  nearly  two  years  with  great  ad-  j 
vantage.    They  now  ask  equality  in  exchanging  ' 
a  few  agricultural  productions  common  to  both  [ 
countries.    Sir,  I  should  deeply  regret  that  the 
United  States,  powerful  and  populous  as  they  are,  ' 
should  withhold  from  a  comparatively  weak  and 
dependent  neighbor  a  privilege  claimed  on  grounds  ' 


so  fair  in  themselves,  and  so  entirely  in  accordance 
with  the  liberal  principles  by  which  we  profess  to 
be  governed.  It  would  be  but  a  poor  encourage- 
ment to  a  country  adopting  our  political  maxims 
to  some  extent,  and  carrying  them  into  the  admin- 
istration of  her  own  commercial  aftairs,  to  be 
driven  from  the  liberal  policy  she  has  espoused 
into  the  old  system  of  exclusion ;  to  be  thus 
checked  at  the  very  outset  in  her  attempts  to  cast 
off  the  shackles  which  she  has  regarded  as  the 
greatest  impediment  to  her  prosperity,  to  be  forced 
to  this  alternative,  too,  by  us— the  country,  above 
all  others,  most  interested  in  the  establishment  and 
maintenance  of  an  enlightened  policy  in  govern- 
ment and  in  commerce. 


■    I 


t 


